War is peace

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

And what, may I ask, is wrong with "retreating" to our own borders and defending those. Are we somehow pretending that we are going to kill every terrorist on earth? If not, then they will always be somewhere. Let them be where they will be. Try to kill them clandestinely or economically, but not via warfare. Ahem, especially warfare that has been completely inept (see, e.g., this week's Time magazine for a history of the missteps that are quickly making Iraq this generation's hate-to-say-we-told-you-so Vietnam).

I'm all for protecting our borders (case in point- border and immigration issues being one of the things I think Bush is a total failure on)- but retreating, bad idea. If you think they will not then bring it here- empowered by our "retreat" from where they are, I submit that you are wrong on every point. Or are you advocating a reinstatement of the ability to assassinate?

I hate to say it, but it appears that the only way to kill terrorists conducting a guerilla campaign is to also kill tons of civilizians that they put themselves in the midst of. This is true whether we attack them preemptively in other countries or attack them in actual retribution in other countries. The terrorists are never going to be hanging out in their own TerrorTown. They take over actual towns and cities, and we must either bomb that city into complete oblivion or let the terrorists escape with the civilians.

Yeah- that sucks. Have to find ways to cut down on that- but you know what- a type of person who will kill a child, and then leave their body somewhere with a bomb to kill the parents when they come for the body is going to find a way to drag in the innocent.

[PanTheMan]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

We're batting O-fer world wide in that regard. Haiti, Colombia, Panama, and others. Every attempt at this kind of regime change necessitating the rebuilding of police and military forces, has ended in failure. There's not a single example of success. I'm not holding my breath on this one.

The Biggest problem with "Another Country" bringing regime change is that there will always be many who believe that other country will somehow be suspect in installing a puppet government.

UNLESS The People of THAT country rise up, and demand change, Why should we do it for them? It is them who will be the ones being governed in the end, and the only way a person can be governed is by allowing themselves to be governed.

As for Iraq becoming a "Magnet" for terrorists all over the world, Rumsfeld has now had to change that story, admitting 95% of the insurgency are IRAQI Nationals. To many there we are seen as OCCUPIERS, not SAVIORS.

[sleepyjeff]

Wow...so much to respond to I don't know where to begin.

1) re: Loss of little freedoms to be more secure. How about loss of little freedoms to save ourselves from a loss of big freedoms. Here is what I mean. Lets say Someone like Dean(not Clinton or Gore because I honestly believe they would have reacted similar to Bush) was President when 9-11 occured. Lets say not a single inconveince was inacted upon the American public. Lets say this emboldened Osama or one of his fans to act again. Lets say this time tens of thousands were killed..........would it be a stretch to say that the new measures put in place after something 10 times bigger then 9-11 would be much, much more invonvenient and our loss of freedoms would not be just faintly noticed(or imagined) but in our faces real?

2)re: Cops on every street corner. Tokyo has em on every corner and I don't hear anybody complaining about the lack of freedom there(except maybe would be criminals)

3)re: Fighting Iraq to remove a secular government only to replace it with a Islamic one. We fought Iraq to remove a dictator who signed a cease fire agreement with us then broke it repeatedly.......we even did the Parental equivalent of counting by fractions....ok Sadaam you have 3 seconds 1, 2, 2.5, 2.75, 2.81, 2.9, 2.95, 2.99, 2.995.....I mean c'mon. We would have never been taken seriously again by any world leader if we didn't go in.

4)re: Retreating. Isn't that what the French do?

[Name]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

2)re: Cops on every street corner. Tokyo has em on every corner and I don't hear anybody complaining about the lack of freedom there(except maybe would be criminals)

I kinda like the cameras everywhere(public) idea, but not monitored by the police, but monitored by the people(read it somewhere). I, for one, would like the ability to take my personal security in my own hands in such a way.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Name

I kinda like the cameras everywhere(public) idea, but not monitored by the police, but monitored by the people(read it somewhere). I, for one, would like the ability to take my personal security in my own hands in such a way.

That's not a bad idea...........

My shop is next to a place that rents Hot Tubs(open air) by the hour......he has cameras everywhere. Not to spy on the hot tubbers but to make sure no one is spying or filming them. Cameras defending against cameras

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff

Lets say not a single inconveince was inacted upon the American public. Lets say this emboldened Osama or one of his fans to act again.

This assumes that Osama and his fans are scared by our lame-ass tactics. It's been proven over and over that these systems suck. There have been tons of reports of people sneaking things into places on purpose to test the systems, and getting through.

The terrorists are not frightened of our pointless bag checks.

Retreating is what America did when they lost the Vietnam War after countless pointless deaths.

[Name]

Retreating. Isn't that what the French do?

heh, and I have yet to hear of too many terrorist attacks occuring in France.

Interesting

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

This assumes that Osama and his fans are scared by our lame-ass tactics. It's been proven over and over that these systems suck. There have been tons of reports of people sneaking things into places on purpose to test the systems, and getting through.

The terrorists are not frightened of our pointless bag checks.

Retreating is what America did when they lost the Vietnam War after countless pointless deaths.

Very good point....there really is no proof that any of these systems have stopped anything.

I would not go as far as to call them lame though. The pathetic bag checks, the taking off of the shoes, etc are not really designed to really stop some one from sneaking something past.......they are designed to slow the flow of people and create an obstacle for a potential terroist. The bag checker will not be the one who catches the bad guy...it will be someone invisible watching from a ways away the behavior of those approaching the obstacle(bag check or what have you) We only see the hand that the security wants us(and the terrorist) to see....we don't see everything

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Name

heh, and I have yet to hear of too many terrorist attacks occuring in France.

Interesting

I just adore the French.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Name

heh, and I have yet to hear of too many terrorist attacks occuring in France.

Interesting

http://www.armenians.com/asala/events.htm

On average about 2 a year.....over 60 in the last 32 years.

The country that runs and hides gets hit quite a bit more then the country that fights back.